If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   Best director Oscar snubs for "Zero Dark Thirty" and "Argo" send a clear message: make a movie in which Americans act heroically against Islamic enemies of the United States, and you lose   (nypost.com) divider line 153
    More: Obvious, John Podhoretz, United States, National Board of Review, Americans, Directors Guild of America, Iranian Hostage Crisis, Naomi Wolf, Leni Riefenstahl  
•       •       •

1372 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jan 2013 at 3:19 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



153 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-11 05:27:11 PM

Lionel Mandrake: paj: Zero Dark Thirty kinda sucked. There, I said it. Not that it was horrible, just that it wasn't good. Shallow performances, stock characters, etc. Politics aside it just wasn't that good a film.

I haven't seen it, but I have noticed that my friends who have are decidedly, "yeah, it was pretty good, I guess."

I'm going to see it tomorrow. I don't know anybody who has seen it. I saw The Hobbit last weekend. Man that was looooooooooong and slooooooooow. A

nd I loved LOTR. But even if it does suck I figure the killing of Bin Laden guarantees no sequels.
 
2013-01-11 05:28:35 PM
Katherine Bigelow got her token "I'm-A-Woman-Director-Pay-Attention-To-Me" Oscar for that crapfest Hurt Locker. I wouldn't watch anything else she's done if it were a free rental. It's garbage, and she sucks. That's probably why she got "snubbed".
 
2013-01-11 05:33:25 PM
I just finished watching Argo, Affleck just keeps getting better and better. He did a great job with the suspense ramping up.

ZDT was okay I suppose. Torture torture torture talk talk talk oh shiat wrong guy KABOOM
 
2013-01-11 05:49:52 PM

gopher321: I remember another line from that film that made me laugh. The main lead actress said something like she was hired by the CIA right out of high school, it was her first job. I think she was saying it to some Chief of Defense guy in a cafeteria...hired right out of high school huh? And your first job was being present in CIA torture sessions in "Black Ops" areas?

Not really - she said she was recruited out of high school in the late 90's. The scene we see with her witnessing the torture is dated 2003. That was her first assignment outside of Langley, not her first assignment in general. She'd been with the CIA for at least four years at that point.
 
2013-01-11 05:52:12 PM
Phuk Islam.
 
2013-01-11 05:53:56 PM

stewmadness: Phuk Islam.


phuk ewe tu
 
2013-01-11 05:57:22 PM

acaciaavenue: Katherine Bigelow got her token "I'm-A-Woman-Director-Pay-Attention-To-Me" Oscar for that crapfest Hurt Locker. I wouldn't watch anything else she's done if it were a free rental. It's garbage, and she sucks. That's probably why she got "snubbed".


If you don't watch "Near Dark", you're really missing out.
 
MFL
2013-01-11 06:06:17 PM
MFL: Lincoln will win. It should win. DDL was amazing.

That being said we all know what comes after this dog and pony show.....another wave of media sycophants attempting to use Lincoln and Obama in the same sentence as many times as possible.


Slaves2Darkness Yeah I mean it is not like they were both from Illinois, both widely unpopular with southerners, both had an opposition party that considered their election to presidency illegitimate or that both did not have to deal with the raising sentiment of succession from the southern states.

1. Obama is from Hawaii. He was handed a political opportunity in Chicago and took it.
2. Nobody thinks his election is illegitimate other than a few kooks you libs love to prop up 3
3. Nobody is seriously thinking of succession. It's just a stupid protest to make a point.

Exploiting everything and anything for political gain what democrats do. I understand that.... but this is getting really dumb.


A hundred and fifty years later and the southern states are spewing the same shiat all over again.

Really?

There is nothing in common there. Obama is not at war with the south. He's at "war" with everyone outside of his urban "get out the vote" machine.

t2.gstatic.com

Where would you draw the battle lines?
 
2013-01-11 06:08:43 PM

Tyrone Slothrop: acaciaavenue: Katherine Bigelow got her token "I'm-A-Woman-Director-Pay-Attention-To-Me" Oscar for that crapfest Hurt Locker. I wouldn't watch anything else she's done if it were a free rental. It's garbage, and she sucks. That's probably why she got "snubbed".

If you don't watch "Near Dark", you're really missing out.


And Point Break.

And I wouldn't mind being Katheryn Bigelow's gigolo.
 
2013-01-11 06:08:58 PM

stewmadness: Phuk Islam.


They're not all bad. And as it turns out, we *can* get the bad ones.

Boom, Headshot
 
2013-01-11 06:10:29 PM

FlashHarry: Brick-House: 0bama wasn't in it!!!

i guess i don't get the 0bama thing. do you use a zero instead of an 'o' because you think the president is an "empty suit?" just curious.


He's a douchebag.There's not much to it.
 
2013-01-11 06:14:47 PM

MFL: He's at "war" with everyone outside of his urban "get out the vote" machine.


Yeah, it must really suck that cities have such high concentrations of people. Damn that Obama! Derp!
 
2013-01-11 06:23:07 PM

MFL: . Obama is not at war with the south. He's at "war" with everyone outside of his urban "get out the vote" machine.


Study it out
 
2013-01-11 06:26:49 PM

MFL: MFL: Obama (...) is at "war" with everyone outside of his urban "get out the vote" machine.


Obama's not at war with anyone (excluding al Qaeda). One of the main gripes that the libbier libs have had with Obama is that he hasn't busted the right wing's balls. Obama is a centrist compromiser. The whole "at war" thing is you, projecting.

Good luck with that.
 
2013-01-11 06:29:10 PM
Well, Jessica Chastain was nominated for best actress in ZDT and will likely win...so there's that.
 
2013-01-11 07:12:27 PM
I'm shocked the NY Post published this opinion.
 
2013-01-11 07:30:47 PM

Pertifly: People keep freaking out about the movies that were nominated for Best Picture but not Best Director. Hint: There are 5 movies up for Best Director, and 10 for best picture. I don't understand how people don't get it.


It's easy. Because movies that get nominated for Best Picture without getting at least nominated for Best Director are pretty much guaranteed to lose. In fact, the last time a movie won Best Picture without getting nominated for Best Director was 1989.

Looking at the Best Director nominees, it looks like the Academy was pretty blatantly trying to guarantee Spielberg won for Lincoln, since Bigelow, Tarantino, and Affleck were considered the most likely people to beat him. The way the nominees are now, Spielberg's only competition is Ang Lee, a first-time director no one has heard of, an Austrian director whose movie no one has seen, and David O. Russell, who is almost universally hated, professionally and personally, by everyone in Hollywood.

Same thing with the Supporting Actor category snubbing Leo DiCaprio and Sam Jackson, making the competition a little easier for Tommy Lee Jones.

Seriously, This year's awards are so bought that the Academy should send the Lincoln producers a receipt.
 
2013-01-11 07:34:43 PM

Lionel Mandrake: paj: Zero Dark Thirty kinda sucked. There, I said it. Not that it was horrible, just that it wasn't good. Shallow performances, stock characters, etc. Politics aside it just wasn't that good a film.

I haven't seen it, but I have noticed that my friends who have are decidedly, "yeah, it was pretty good, I guess."


It's a very good action thriller, but it works more as a police procedural than any kind of political statement. Basically, pundits have been getting butthurt for more than a year for what boils down to a pretty good detective story.
 
2013-01-11 07:43:21 PM
Oh, pooh. Directors ALWAYS find some reason why they got "snubbed" if they didn't get a Best Director nod, especially if their picture got a Best Picture nomination. And critics always find some kind of theme or reason why their favorite films or directors got skipped even when it's blatantly untrue. If there was some kind of "anti-American" bias here, then why did Zero Dark Thirty and Argo get the Best Picture nom, and only the DIRECTORS got skipped? Answer: Because it was the directors who weren't perceived to be "best". If it had in fact been an anti-American bias, it would have been the pictures themselves that got dropped. Duh.

A few years back, IIRC, when there was a glut of WWII films, there was the same kind of hysteria over someone or other being "snubbed" because he was too pro-American or too pro-German or whatever (the specifics escape me); a while before that, it was anti-Mexican bias or whatever. The Academy Awards are all backroom politics anyway, and have very little to do with who really made the "better" movie. The Golden Globes are a better sampling of what the public actually liked.
 
2013-01-11 07:51:40 PM

sigdiamond2000: "Conservative" media before release of Zero Dark Thirty: "We must boycott this love letter to Fartbama to send a mesage to the Hollyweird Homocrats!"

"Conservative" media after release of Zero Dark Thirty: "Why do Hollyweird Homocrats refuse to properly acknowledge the greatness of this film?!?"


When was this latest round of right wing derp unleashed? Because today at work this lady was ranting on about the snub and how it was because they were about Americans beating Muslim. Mind you that about 4 months ago she was screaming about Zero Dark 30 being a propaganda film made so Obama could get reelected, and before that she was screaming about how Affleck was a socialist traitor for his support of teachers. It is amazing how fast these people can change their opinion on something to fit their agenda, even if their new opinion completely contradicts their old one. If you wrote a movie about this, nobody would believe you.
 
2013-01-11 08:16:53 PM

ongbok: Mind you that about 4 months ago she was screaming about Zero Dark 30 being a propaganda film made so Obama could get reelected


Yeah, I remember those talking points as well. Now it's a great American film about American heroes Americanning some Muslims.

It is amazing how fast these people can change their opinion on something to fit their agenda, even if their new opinion completely contradicts their old one.

Yeah. This.
 
2013-01-11 08:30:02 PM
Hollywood should go back to making movies where US troops are child-killing, woman-raping, drug-addled hillbilly psychopaths. That or clinically depressed burnouts ready to frag their officers or become presidential assassins. You know, the "golden years".
 
2013-01-11 08:35:30 PM

Fuggin Bizzy: ongbok: Mind you that about 4 months ago she was screaming about Zero Dark 30 being a propaganda film made so Obama could get reelected

Yeah, I remember those talking points as well. Now it's a great American film about American heroes Americanning some Muslims.

It is amazing how fast these people can change their opinion on something to fit their agenda, even if their new opinion completely contradicts their old one.

Yeah. This.


We call this "doublethink" Citizen.
 
2013-01-11 09:54:34 PM
I know nothing about movies except how to watch them. That being said, isn't this category voted on by other directors? Maybe they just failed to impress their peers with their mad director skills. Or something.
 
2013-01-11 09:55:14 PM
Daniel Day Lewis in Gangs of New York was awesome.
 
2013-01-11 10:02:14 PM
Haven't seen the movies yet, so I can't comment... I doubt they're all that great... but let's face it, the competition isn't very good either. Why is ever other movie that comes out some farking comic book shiat? Seriously, when will this genre die? How long did the spaghetti-western era last? Let's hope it ends some time soon, I want to go to a movie some day...
 
2013-01-11 10:16:11 PM
Jesus, nominated for Best Picture just isn't good enough. What a farking crybaby.

From what I remember hearing, both of these movies are "ok", but nothing to gush about for the next 10 years. Nothing for the record books, in other words.
 
2013-01-11 10:25:29 PM

BeatrixK: Looking forward to seeing ZDT this weekend.

I LURVE me some Tarantino - but I didn't disagree with his lack of a nod for Director: Django needed about 30 minutes less. Walz was just the sniznit and should walk away with the award - but it would be a serious horse race if the egregious oversights of no Samuel L Jackson and DiCaprio weren't left off. (Walz would still probably have the edge - but it would be close if those two hadn't been completely ignored.)

(Seriously - Leo had to have killed a buttload of Academy member puppies to get the routine snubs he's on the wrong end of!)


This is really tough, because all three of them were fantastic...but I can understand the idea behind not wanting to give more than one supporting actor nom to the same movie. And if we're going on merit, I'd say that Waltz was very slightly better than DiCaprio, who was equally slightly better than Jackson. If it were me, though, I might have given the nomination to DiCaprio just because the guy deserves a freaking Oscar (got robbed for The Aviator in my opinion) and Waltz already has one. Would have been really great to see all three of them up there, though. I also wouldn't have minded Michael Fassbender for Prometheus, but it would have been a long shot.
 
2013-01-11 10:25:42 PM

Rwa2play: Les Miserables really didn't need to be made...since it had been already done.


Wrong, it needed to be made so I'd know about this beautful singer.
pmcmovieline.files.wordpress.com
Hathaway and Seyfried I knew about, but not her.
 
2013-01-11 10:30:04 PM

Gyrfalcon: We call this "doublethink" Citizen.


Touché.
 
2013-01-11 10:37:17 PM

cptrios: BeatrixK: Looking forward to seeing ZDT this weekend.

I LURVE me some Tarantino - but I didn't disagree with his lack of a nod for Director: Django needed about 30 minutes less. Walz was just the sniznit and should walk away with the award - but it would be a serious horse race if the egregious oversights of no Samuel L Jackson and DiCaprio weren't left off. (Walz would still probably have the edge - but it would be close if those two hadn't been completely ignored.)

(Seriously - Leo had to have killed a buttload of Academy member puppies to get the routine snubs he's on the wrong end of!)

This is really tough, because all three of them were fantastic...but I can understand the idea behind not wanting to give more than one supporting actor nom to the same movie. And if we're going on merit, I'd say that Waltz was very slightly better than DiCaprio, who was equally slightly better than Jackson. If it were me, though, I might have given the nomination to DiCaprio just because the guy deserves a freaking Oscar (got robbed for The Aviator in my opinion) and Waltz already has one. Would have been really great to see all three of them up there, though. I also wouldn't have minded Michael Fassbender for Prometheus, but it would have been a long shot.


It's unusual, but movies have had multiple nominees. The first 2 Godfather movies had 3 nominations apiece in the Supporting Actor category.

I was really surprised that DiCaprio got overlooked simply by how big of a risk he took with his performance. That was the kind of role that, if he'd screwed it up, his career could have come to an abrupt halt.

Odds are, he'll end up like Pacino. He'll have about 3 more nominations before he finally wins for a lesser movie.
 
2013-01-11 11:37:16 PM

Kurmudgeon: Hathaway and Seyfried I knew about, but not her.


Samantha Barks- she came through the world of stage acting. Only one in the cast who had played their movie role on stage, I think. She did Eponine for the 25th Anniversary version too, which is how I learned about her.
 
2013-01-11 11:45:33 PM

MFL: MFL: Lincoln will win. It should win. DDL was amazing.

That being said we all know what comes after this dog and pony show.....another wave of media sycophants attempting to use Lincoln and Obama in the same sentence as many times as possible.

Slaves2Darkness Yeah I mean it is not like they were both from Illinois, both widely unpopular with southerners, both had an opposition party that considered their election to presidency illegitimate or that both did not have to deal with the raising sentiment of succession from the southern states.

1. Obama is from Hawaii. He was handed a political opportunity in Chicago and took it.
2. Nobody thinks his election is illegitimate other than a few kooks you libs love to prop up 3
3. Nobody is seriously thinking of succession. It's just a stupid protest to make a point.

Exploiting everything and anything for political gain what democrats do. I understand that.... but this is getting really dumb.


A hundred and fifty years later and the southern states are spewing the same shiat all over again.

Really?

There is nothing in common there. Obama is not at war with the south. He's at "war" with everyone outside of his urban "get out the vote" machine.

[t2.gstatic.com image 276x183]

Where would you draw the battle lines?


So he concentrates on the areas with the most voters? My goodness, he is an evil genius.
 
2013-01-12 12:55:19 AM
FTFA: "Zero Dark Thirty" has come under criticism because it features scenes in which an American interrogator uses so-called "harsh techniques" like waterboarding against an al Qaeda operative. The operative isn't punished for his actions, nor are those actions questioned by his colleagues - so journalists who have spent a decade attacking the War on Terror for its cruel depradations have expressed disgust at Bigelow's handling of what they view as torture.

I'm sorry. Isn't Bigelow's movie supposed to be based on the true story? Haven't we been torturing people during this war on terror? Are we now to the point where "journalists" are deciding on our behalf what we should be seeing in movies?
 
2013-01-12 03:08:08 AM
Meh, I think the problems with these movies is that they tried to genuinely portray the intricate nature of real historical situations and say something truly meaningful about the nature of life.

In other words, they weren't consciously filling their films with pointless tripe other directors/actors "always wanted to do" for the sole purpose of Oscar bait. It's cool, Les Miserables has them covered on boring, stupid awards show baiting, so they're free to just be good movies instead.
 
2013-01-12 03:50:38 AM
WHAR nomunashun four EASTWOOD? WHAR?
 
2013-01-12 04:06:51 AM

bongmiester: kronicfeld: Christolph Waltz is nominated for best supporting actor

and deserves to win


I finally saw Green Hornet last weekend, on late night cable, and Waltz does a good villain in it.

'Who is this Green Hornet? He beheaded a statue? I behead real people all the time!'
 
2013-01-12 04:27:56 AM

Kurmudgeon: Rwa2play: Les Miserables really didn't need to be made...since it had been already done.

Wrong, it needed to be made so I'd know about this beautful singer.
[pmcmovieline.files.wordpress.com image 630x454]
Hathaway and Seyfried I knew about, but not her.


I remember seeing the show in the theater, many years back, and thought the others mad for ignoring Eponine. She seemed like the hot one. I dunno if it's the same actress as then, probably not, but looks similar.
 
2013-01-12 06:19:15 AM
Here's a hint, "director": You want to win an Oscar? Make an Oscar-worthy movie and not this shiate.
 
2013-01-12 08:20:16 AM

gopher321: Oh, and I saw Argo too. Bored me to tears. Important rule in filmaking: if you're setting is in Canada, or you're depicting Canadians, it's gonna be boring.


Heh, heh.
 
2013-01-12 08:34:37 AM

cptjeff: make me some tea: Correct. I think many people see it as black and white, and it's not. We've tortured people and have gotten some actionable intel from doing so.

But not in this case- the movie is wrong, though not by any deliberate measures on the part of the people who made it. The reason the Senate is investigating is because a lot of this movie was made in close collaboration with CIA sources, and the Senate Intelligence Committee wants to know if the CIA deliberately lied to the producers of this movie to justify their torture program.

Basically, a bunch of senators with bipartisan cred thinks the CIA was deliberately trying to distort the popular perception of the historical record to make themselves and their torture program look good.


Weerll, both Argo and Zero Dark Thirty deliberately change key events to make them more acceptable for mainstream Americans, and justify that by saying well, it's a fictionalized account. Unfortunately a LOT of people will accept them as close enough to the truth and be misinformed despite any disclaimers.
 
2013-01-12 08:41:08 AM

MFL: MFL: Lincoln will win. It should win. DDL was amazing.

That being said we all know what comes after this dog and pony show.....another wave of media sycophants attempting to use Lincoln and Obama in the same sentence as many times as possible.

Slaves2Darkness Yeah I mean it is not like they were both from Illinois, both widely unpopular with southerners, both had an opposition party that considered their election to presidency illegitimate or that both did not have to deal with the raising sentiment of succession from the southern states.

1. Obama is from Hawaii. He was handed a political opportunity in Chicago and took it.
2. Nobody thinks his election is illegitimate other than a few kooks you libs love to prop up 3
3. Nobody is seriously thinking of succession. It's just a stupid protest to make a point.

Exploiting everything and anything for political gain what democrats do. I understand that.... but this is getting really dumb.


A hundred and fifty years later and the southern states are spewing the same shiat all over again.

Really?

There is nothing in common there. Obama is not at war with the south. He's at "war" with everyone outside of his urban "get out the vote" machine.



Where would you draw the battle lines?


Um, maybe where the majority of you live?
 
2013-01-12 08:49:23 AM

ReverendJasen: Here's a hint, "director": You want to win an Oscar? Make an Oscar-worthy movie and not this shiate.


You were expecting half-retard, but were met with non-retard.  Then you went full retard.  The Academy half-heartedly beckons.
 
2013-01-12 11:35:02 AM

make me some tea: AmazinTim: coco ebert: make me some tea

Overall, did you find the movie more right-wing or left-wing in its depiction of torture (it is sad that we even have a divided population on this issue but I digress).

One interesting thing about this movie was that it was entirely morally ambivalent. It had no opinions. It wasn't left or right, right or wrong, it just was.

When the torturing went away, it became operationally more difficult to get information, and the information that ultimately led to UBL's death came from the detainee program.

Yes, IMHO, they did a fine job of making it apolitical. I appreciated that. It leaves the moral judgment up to the viewer. I'm rather confused by people who are trying to turn it into a political football, because it really isn't. This is what happened, this is how it happened, it's up to you to feel bad, good or indifferent about it


They're doing it because it MUST BE! Because it's about such a hot-button issue in this country that it absolutely positively MUST support my side or their side! Otherwise I'd have to actually WATCH IT and form MY OWN opinion and then I'll start WEEPING UNCONTROLLABLY!
 
2013-01-12 11:49:06 AM
If it were still 5 directors and 5 best pictures, this would have some legs (they've snubbed people in the past VERY effectively), but since it's now more Best Pictures than directors, people literally MUST be "snubbed."

JerkyMeat: Oh yes, subby, because propaganda should always be awarded.


Know how I know you haven't seen either movie?
 
2013-01-12 12:42:00 PM

jjorsett: Hollywood should go back to making movies where US troops are child-killing, woman-raping, drug-addled hillbilly psychopaths. That or clinically depressed burnouts ready to frag their officers or become presidential assassins. You know, the "golden years".


What?
 
2013-01-12 12:46:42 PM
I love how:

2 x Best Picture
Best Actress
Best Supporting Actor
2 x Best Writing
Best Original Score
2 x Best Sound Editing
Best Sound Mixing
2 x Best Film Editing

12 nominations between them (including two in the very top category), but they didn't get nominated in one category means the people involved are out to stop any such movies from getting recognition.
 
2013-01-12 02:45:00 PM
ok, just watched "zero dark thirty". it was alright, but i think movies over 150 minutes should be exclusively focused on italian-american mafia stories, or adaptations of tolkien epics.
 
2013-01-12 04:12:45 PM
Heh, "act heroically". You tortured countless people and then shot an unarmed, sleeping man and two women. BTW: you also created the Taliban.
 
2013-01-12 04:21:56 PM

proteus_b: italian-american mafia stories


filmbalaya.files.wordpress.com
And Jewish mafia stories.

katechaplin.files.wordpress.com

And irish American mafia stories.

collider.com

And pornish American stories.

ecx.images-amazon.com

And anything by Tarantino
 
Displayed 50 of 153 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report